Friday, January 28, 2011

A group of Belgian doctors are harvesting "high quality" organs from patients who have been euthanized. Are we surprised? The only thought that crosses my mind is, who will be next? Remember euthanasia is legal in Belgian.

The Belgian doctors are not keeping their efforts at providing high quality organs a secret. In fact, the news hit the press, when they openly described their Soilent Green efforts at a medical conference in December 2010. In fact, in a Power Point presentation, several doctors from the University Hospitals of Antwerp, Leuven And Liege, showed that about 20% of the people who died through official euthanasia in 2008, were suffering from neuromuscular disorders.

Neuromuscular disorders ... Hmmmmmm. Brain injury from auto accidents? Strokes ... due to age or life-style? Neuromuscular disease like MS? These diseases usually happen to younger people. Hmmmmm. Are these organs of "high quality" because of the age of the donor? Does the euthanized donor know he's a donor?

So Belgian doctors have created a mind-set, that disabled people's lives are more valuable dead than alive. Gives a whole new meaning to the word Zombie.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

The White House and President Obama rolled out the red carpet last week, hosting a lavish state dinner for the Chinese Delegation and President Hu Jintao, in order to strengthen relations, particularly business and economic relations, between the United States and the Chinese government. President Obama stated that this dinner was a great way to pay tribute to two great nations. Oh really? Since when is a lavish state dinner hosted for a hostile nation? And since when do business and economics supersede human rights? And just what is the United States getting in return for all that we are giving away to China?

The Chinese merchandise, which is being purchased off the shelves of Walmart and Target, are the products of forced labor camps. Harry Wu, Human Rights Activist and himself a survivor of a Chinese labor camp, stated in an interview with Raymond Arroyo of EWTN's The World Over, that there are 3 million Chinese prisoners in these forced labor camps, manufacturing the products being sold to America. He further went on to state, that China has become the # 2 country behind the United States, in organ transplantation, with the organs being harvested from condemned prisoners, whether voluntary or not; though mostly not. Chai Ling, former protest leader and survivor of the Tienmanen Square massacre, also states, that there are 35,000 forced abortions being performed daily, as China continues it's One Child policy.

The United States is also very graciously sharing much of our technology with China. Boeing is sharing it's aeronautical and space technology, and we are also sharing our Internet technology with this great human rights bastion. And what are we getting in return? Pandas! Yes, the Zoos of America are getting a new 5 year lease on Pandas ... for the bargain basement price of $500,000 dollars a year! Gee ... I guess we'll just add that on to the $252 billion dollar trade deficit tab we already have with them .. as well as ... it will be another $500,000 dollars that they can spend to build up their military might, which is how they are currently using our US dollars.

So ... China continues it's scandalous abuse of human rights, and gets rewarded with a lavish state dinner, free US technology and more money for their military prowess, while we get rented Pandas! I wonder if the pandas will be allowed to have more than one baby?

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Twenty-seven years ago, President Ronald Reagan wrote on abortion in terms who eloquence and perception have never been matched:

The 10th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade is a good time for us to pause and reflect. Our nationwide policy of abortion-on-demand through all nine months of pregnancy was neither voted for by our people nor enacted by our legislators — not a single state had such unrestricted abortion before the Supreme Court decreed it to be national policy in 1973. But the consequences of this judicial decision are now obvious: since 1973, more than 15 million unborn children have had their lives snuffed out by legalized abortions. That is over ten times the number of Americans lost in all our nation's wars.

Make no mistake, abortion-on-demand is not a right granted by the Constitution. No serious scholar, including one disposed to agree with the Court's result, has argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to create such a right. Shortly after the Roe v. Wade decision, Professor John Hart Ely, now Dean of Stanford Law School, wrote that the opinion "is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be." Nowhere do the plain words of the Constitution even hint at a "right" so sweeping as to permit abortion up to the time the child is ready to be born. Yet that is what the Court ruled.

Today is the anniversary of the worst Supreme Court decision in U.S. history, Roe v. Wade, and its companion decision, Doe v. Bolton. On January 22nd, 1973, the Supreme Court found, in essence, that an unborn baby had no rights that a born person was bound to respect, and was subject to being summarily killed at any point throughout all nine months of pregnancy, and sometimes even beyond, for any reason or no reason, and by the cruelest means imaginable.

Here in Illinois, there are virtually no restrictions on abortion at all. As former State Rep. Penny Pullen has remarked, even veterinary clinics are better regulated than abortion clinics.

On this 38th anniversary, with an awareness of what's at stake, let us each and all re-commit ourselves to opposing abortion in our speech, our actions, our activism, our votes, our communities, and our lives.

Friday, January 21, 2011

Webster's Dictionary defines choice as, "the right, power, or chance to choose, or options." God created us and endowed us with Free Will. Deuteronomy 30:19 "I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. Choose life then, that you and your descendants may live." So God warns us that our free will is to be used to choose life not death .. good not evil .. blessings not a curse.

So it is not so much about choice, as it is about the object of our choice. All people have the right to choose. But even our societal laws are enacted in order to limit and protect us from bad choices. So our choices are limited, whether we like it or not. Society does not capriciously limit our choices, without carefully considering the right or wrongness of those choices, and if they deprive someone else of their rights of liberty, life and the pursuit of happiness.

So, in 1973 a cataclysmic choice was enshrined by the Supreme Court, which capriciously deprived the unborn of their right to life. This choice has completely changed the meaning of the word choice, for all society. This use of the word choice has devastated people's ability to discern between right and wrong. Simply believing that one has a choice to do something, is half baked and moronic. How about considering if the choice is a good or a bad one, or if it will hurt someone else, or take away their choice?

"All social engineering is preceded by verbal engineering." said Father William Smith long ago. So true in 2011, as we look back at 38 years of legal abortion, where the word choice was linguistically, gymnastically crafted to legalize murder on demand.

#prochoice @NARAL #BlogforChoiceDay #prolife
Tell someone who identifies as "pro-choice" that they are "pro-abortion. Try it. If you ever have, you know that, without exception, they take great offense.

This is not a new phenomenon. During the Lincoln-Douglas debates, Abraham Lincoln referred to Stephen A. Douglas as being pro-slavery. Douglas, who actually owned slaves indirectly through his wife, took great umbrage at the label. Douglas' stated position was that he was not pro-slavery, but rather that he was in favor of allowing each state to decide its own policies regarding slavery. In the parlance of today, Douglas was "pro-choice" on slavery. Of course, he never inquired as to what "choice" the slaves themselves might prefer.

Does anyone remember anything Stephen A. Douglas ever did or said on any other topic? Defending slavery was hardly his life's work. As a three-term U.S. Senator, Douglas devoted himself to streamlining the process of bringing new western states into the Union. Douglas' driving passion was the expansion of the United States. But what he is remembered for is having been wrong on slavery.

On this anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, politicians of today should take a lesson from Stephen Douglas. Those on the wrong side of the abortion debate, who finesse their positions by claiming to be "personally opposed, but..." pro-choice civil libertarians -- especially those Democrats who want to regulate every single other aspect of our lives -- are only going to be remembered for their complicity in the murders of over 53,000,000 innocents so far, a holocaust that dwarfs the achievements of Hitler or Stalin.

What do they mean by "choice" anyway? I'll give you a hint: they're not talking about peanut butter.

"Choice" means the right of a woman to choose whether to love her baby, or kill him.

"Choice" means that you have to pay, through your federal, state, and local governments, over $300,000,000 per year to Planned Parenthood alone.

"Choice" means that a baby might be killed by having her arms, legs and head sawed off in the womb, and her trunk divided into sections.

"Choice" means that a baby might be killed by having his body bathed in acid.

"Choice" means that a baby might be killed by having her birth forced prematurely, and be left to gasp out her life in a soiled hospital linen closet, or else have her skull pierced with a pair of scissors.

"Choice' means that a baby's humanity (or lack thereof) will be judged by his health.

"Choice" means that a baby's humanity will be judged not on her health, but on her ability to survive outside the environment that's natural for her state of development.

"Choice" means that his humanity will be judged on his father's criminal conduct.

"Choice" means that a baby has no rights that a born person must respect.

"Choice" means that we have to tolerate 1.5 million abortions per year, including women getting their third and fourth abortions, including abortions as birth control, including partial birth and other late term abortions, including abortions instead of reporting child abuse, including abortions instead of reporting statutory rape, including abortions for minors without their parents' knowledge or consent and including nearly half (or more) of abortions sought because the mother was either coerced or abandoned by someone on whom she should have been able to depend.

Basically, the pro-aborts are going to be out in force celebrating the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and the advent of the "right to choose." You can help, too. Wherever you are, on-line or in person, on Facebook, Twitter, blogs, or anywhere you see or hear anyone celebrating "choice", make sure that you challenge them, asking, "what do you mean by 'choice'?" What "choice" are they talking about? The "choice" they have in China to only have one baby per family? The "choice" of women everywhere who are coerced into having abortions? Or is it simply the "choice" to take an innocent human life, for any reason or no reason, and by the cruelest means imaginable?

Join us.

And if you have your own blog and want to participate, contact Jill, and she'll add you to the list.

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Let's take a little detour this week. The term ObamaCare is frequently used as a nickname for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA). But in reality, the structural changes to American health care were enacted in three separate pieces of legislation. The additional two are the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the "stimulus" law). One of the critical sections of the stimulus law is where it creates the mechanism to convert 100% of the health care sector to electronic health records (EHRs). This mission is being carried out by the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology which is headed by David Blumenthal, MD. Just to give you a sense of how dramatic this change will be, the current penetration of fully function Electronic Medical Records into the market (yes, we used to have a marketplace in the health sector) is currently 10.1%. As a result of this drive towards universal HIT, numerous start-up companies have begun building software systems to meet the upcoming needs of the health care sector (here and here are just some samplings). Moreover, existing companies have begun dramatically increasing their capacity to provide software systems and technical support. All of this is being done due to government intervention.

Many of us who are scarred veterans of HIT have worried that this transition risks adversely affecting patients. Many were hopeful that the stated objectives of the move to HIT - increased patient safety and improved quality of care - would result in the federal government instituting mechanisms to insure these new systems would be safe, effective, easy to use, and result in better outcomes. They would be disappointed. As many of us suspected, the real reason for instituting national HIT is to make rationing care in real time a reality. How do I come to this conclusion? The regulations for new electronic health care systems have now been published under the title "meaningful use," and they don't address safety issues at all. I am not the only one who has noticed this omission. The Leapfrog Group has also expressed grave concerns. David Blumenthal himself was kind enough to write an editorial summarizing the "meaningful use" regulations. In this editorial, one can find a chart summarizing the system "objectives" necessary for health care companies and professionals to receive financial incentives. Let's break down what they really mean:

1. The first several objectives relate to some basic information that EHRs are expected to capture including vital signs, medications, problem lists, etc. The key issue here is that this information needs to be collected as "structured data." This reason structured data is so important is that it allows information to be mined and transferred. This isn't all bad. If we are going to move to an entirely electronic record keeping system, it would make sense to use structured data to allow easy transfer of records from one EHR system to another. On the other hand, the more structured the data the easier it is to mine for purposes unrelated to patient care. For example, one of the serious problems with the PPACA is that it requires the federal government engage in dramatic invasions of medical privacy. It is through this structured data that information will be collected by the government, insurance companies, and other entities. Of course the least structured data - and thus the most secure from electronic prying eyes - comes in the form of paper charts.

2. Further down the list of objectives comes the requirement for Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) and electronic prescribing. Despite the claims that these requirements will improve safety, there is no evidence that simply requiring widespread adoption will accomplish this goal. In actuality, there is ample evidence that even well established CPOE systems come with significant risks to patients (my favorite part of the linked article is where the Advocate public relations specialist claims everything was fine, move along, nothing to see). Rather than implement some sort of safety evaluation similar to that undergone by drugs and medical devices, the regulation simply requires that they be used with minimum frequency. The real reason for this is the same as the reason for requiring structured data. It is impossible to intercept and modify prescriptions and other orders if they are written on paper. One should not underestimate the desire of the government and the insurance companies to get control of the order entry system. This would give them the ability to influence physician decisions in real time.

Remind me again, what problem were we trying to solve when abortion was declared a "right"? Wasn't it something about women dying from illegal, "back-alley" abortions? So, what about this guy:

An abortion doctor who catered to minorities, immigrants and poor women was charged with eight counts of murder in the deaths of a patient and seven babies who were born alive and then killed with scissors, prosecutors said Wednesday.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell, 69, made millions of dollars over 30 years, performing as many illegal, late-term abortions as he could, prosecutors said. State regulators ignored complaints about him and failed to visit or inspect his clinic since 1993, but no charges were warranted against them, District Attorney Seth Williams said.

Gosnell "induced labor, forced the live birth of viable babies in the sixth, seventh, eighth month of pregnancy and then killed those babies by cutting into the back of the neck with scissors and severing their spinal cord," Williams said.

Williams said patients were subjected to squalid and barbaric conditions at Gosnell's Women's Medical Society.

The woman who died was identified as 41-year-old Karnamaya Mongar, who died in November, 2009.

Authorities went to investigate drug-related complaints at the clinic last year and stumbled on what Williams called a "house of horrors."

"There were bags and bottles holding aborted fetuses were scattered throughout the building," Williams said. "There were jars, lining shelves, with severed feet that he kept for no medical purpose."

The clinic was shut down and Gosnell's medical license was suspended after the raid.

Here in Illinois, veterinary clinics are better regulated than abortion "clinics". How many facilities do we have like this one?

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Black genocide is a reality that our society refuses to admit, and as a result it has devastated the Black community. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 1.21 million abortions were performed in the United States in 2008. Afro-American women accounted for 30% of those abortions, while Blacks in the United States account for only 12% of the US population. These statistics show a terrible disproportion in the number of abortions between Blacks and other ethnic groups.

Many people believe that abortion is the answer to social and economic issues. Do we really thin that killing solves a social or economic issue? Why are we surprised when violence erupts, if our society believes killing an innocent unborn baby is a mere personal choice, and not an act of violence. The word choice is a method of verbal engineering, and linguistic gymnastics, designed to cloak the truth!

Study after study reveals that the biggest factor in educational success is family background and values. A Rand study concluded that $500 billion dollars would be added annually to our GDP (Gross Domestic Product) if test scores of Black and Latino children reached national averages.

Consider this ... In 1969 (3 yrs. before the Roe decision) 68% of Americans said, premarital sex is wrong. In 2011, only 32 % now believe it is wrong. When we remove marriage from family and society, the results are evident.

A Black child has a 50% chance of being aborted, and if born, a 70% chance of living in a single parent home. Planned Parenthood fully understands this. Since they provide a third of our nation's abortions, and receive $300 million dollars annually from the federal government, they can then use this blood money, to set up abortion clinics in predominantly Black neighborhoods. And they do! Why? Why predominantly in poor Black neighborhoods? "Black Genocide"

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN), has introduced a bill, HB217 that would deny Title X federal family planning funding to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers:

It is morally wrong to end an unborn human life by abortion. It is also morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans and use them to promote abortion at home or abroad.

Last year, Planned Parenthood received more than $363 million in revenue from government grants and contracts. During that same time, they performed an unprecedented 324,008 abortions.

The largest abortion provider in America should not also be the largest recipient of federal funding under Title X.

The Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act will prevent any family planning funds under Title X from going to Planned Parenthood or other organizations that perform abortions. It will ensure that abortion providers are not being subsidized with federal tax dollars.

Pence boasts over 120 co-sponsors to this bill, including our own Joe Walsh (R-IL), of the 8th District.

I spoke with Congressman Walsh today, and he told me:

This is one of the first pieces of legislation that I'm a co-sponsor on, and it's an honor.

You know as well as I do that Planned Parenthood receives an idiotically high amount of funding from the government, and they continue to perform an unprecedented number of abortions.

If there's anything like a common ground on this issue, it's that public money shouldn't be used to fund abortion. It's a privilege and an honor to co-sponsor this bill.

Congressman Bob Dold (R-IL), of the 10th District, ran on a platform that included opposition to public funding of abortion, although Dold identifies himself as being pro-choice. According to Pence's office, Dold is not a co-sponsor of this bill, and a call to Dold's office asking the Congressman's position on this bill has not been returned.

News from the Guttmacher Institute, which was widely circulated yesterday, revealed that the number of abortions in the United States has risen slightly. Guttmacher is the reporting arm for Planned Parenthood and is considered to have very accurate abortion figures; more so than the Center for Disease Control, because Guttmacher receives it's numbers directly from the abortion businesses and accounts for all 50 states. Please note, we said the abortion business. Abortion is a business ... a big business ... well funded ... well staffed and with well thought out strategy.

Here's the info. The abortion rate, which is the percentage of pregnancies which end in abortion, had reached their lowest point in 2005. Now it has gone up, from a rate of 19.4% of pregnancies ending in abortion in 2005, to 19.6% in 2008.

A Guttmacher researcher for the Institute said, she believed the downturn in the economy had a role in the slight upturn in the abortion numbers. Rachel Jones said, "We expect that the economy did impact unintended pregnancy and abortion, but other factors did as well."

Perhaps those other factors may be Planned Parenthood's emphasis on chemical abortions and "mega clinics" in urban areas.

Guttmacher admits, that looking only at the relatively small change in national numbers, hides the substantial change in some states. Take for instance New York. (see our blog on New York abortion statistics for more information).

Guttmacher's report found an increase in chemical abortions, especially RU486. They found, that out of 199,000 reported abortions, 16% of that total had used the drug RU486. This truly is cause for concern because RU486 is a very dangerous drug. We will never know the actual number of women, who have had serious health problems, including hemorrhages or ruptured ectopic pregnancies, who have used the drug.

Pro-abortion advocates have long claimed, that they want abortion to be safe, legal and rare; yet these statistics proves quite the opposite. Abortion is not safe, legal and certainly not rare, but increasingly very profitable.

A group of clergy, including staunch abortion opponent Archbishop Timothy Dolan, last week cast a spotlight on the phenomenon. Dolan called the abortion count "chilling." One need not agree with his position to find the description apt.

The rate reflects an epidemic of irresponsible sexual behavior that has serious social and economic impacts. ...

When you consider that nationwide, about a quarter of pregnancies end in abortion, it's clear that New York City has too many men and too many women who are engaging in sex without thinking through the consequences.

... there must also be a revolution in personal responsibility. A culture in which sex just happens and pregnancies end as casually as they begin is not healthy.

What I find to be missing from this opinion piece is just why the author believes that so many abortions are such a bad thing.

I know why I think so: abortion is the intentional taking of an innocent human life, and that's always a bad thing. Not only is it cruel and unjust to the child being killed, but it's also harmful and dangerous to the mother, cruel to the father, and serves to generally devalue human life in society at large.

But when pro-choicers start wringing their hands about the abortion rate, one must question their commitment to "choice". If it's just "choice" they're in favor of, why should the result of that choice be alarming?

Monday, January 10, 2011

The tragedy of the recent shooting in Arizona, has already sparked the usual "Blame Game" scenario. Our society has fallen into a mentality where opposing sides of any ideology, political or otherwise, use any given tragedy as an excuse to vilify one another. Even the random act of an obviously mentally disturbed individual is an excuse for this type of capitalization.

The recent Arizona tragedy, which critically injured a well liked and respected Congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords, and resulted in the deaths of 6 others, one of which is an innocent 9 yr. old child, and also the Chief Federal Judge of Arizona John Roll, is the current trigger for sparking the blame game.

The shooter, 22 yr. old Jared Loughner, is an obviously disturbed young man who has been losing his grip on reality, since high school. This is indicated by seeing his recent you-tube videos, which he produced, that are incoherent and bizarre and obviously delusional. Also, recent intervies with Loughner's high school classmates, reveal a disturbing pattern which obviously escalated into a complete break with reality.

The blame game started, within the first 15 mins. after the shooting. The blame gamers have taken aim at the Tea Party to Sarah Palin and it continues, unabated in major media, as we write this blog. Even our own Senator Dick Durbin has weighed in on the blame game.

The medical profession itself still does not have all the answers to the riddles of disturbed pathology. So how can someone like Sherriff Clarence Dupnik, a chief investigating officer in the case, presume to know what the medical profession itself does not? He summed up his diagnosis with these words: "I think the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business and what we see on TV and how our youngsters are being raised, shows that this has not become the nice United States of America that most of us grew up in." Really? Perhaps the Sherriff forgot the Cole Younger gang of the 1800's, the machine-gun shoot outs of the Mafia in the 1920's, Bonnie & Clyde of the 1930's, and the more recent John Wayne Gacey, to name a few. Has he forgotten the innocent college students who were gunned down on a Ohio college campus in the early 1970's? Is that the nice America he is speaking about?

The act of one loony tune, seems to bring all the other loonies out of the closet. The reasoning, that you can understand the reasoning of a mad man is truly mad. Believing that you can play the blame game because of the mad act of a mad individual is even more mad. Will the real crazy person please stand up. Don't all stand at once.

If one wants to play the blame game, who is really responsible for the care of the mentally ill, and the protection of society from these unfortunate individuals; and how does one implement that control and protection? Can we really be expected to catch every disturbed mind before it reels out of control? Is every single tragedy within our power to predict and prevent? Hurricane Katrina, and act of nature, also sparked the blame game. Now, another act of a mentally disturbed individual, who had apparently been walking about out there like a ticking time bomb, has also created the idea, that we are somehow divinely in control of everything in life, from acts of nature, to the acts of mad men. Certainly we must do all within our power to prevent and mitigate tragedies like this from occurring, to the best of our abilities. But to think that we will always be able to do so, is another form of madness. Even worse, is to think that we can find someone to blame every time an act of nature, or an out of control madman strikes, is beyond mad.

Friday, January 7, 2011

Sometime in the next few days, the Illinois General Assembly will pass, and the governor will sign, a bundle of tax hikes that includes a 75% increase in the personal income tax rate, a 100% increase in the corporate tax rate, an increase in cigarette taxes, and virtually no authentic limits on state spending.

If you are pro-choice, and unhappy about this situation, please understand that this is the fault of the pro-abortion forces in (and around) the Democratic Party.

Terry Cosgrove of the pro-abortion Personal PAC very credibly claims a lion's share of the credit for the re-election of Gov. Quinn, who has championed these tax increases. Too, Cosgrove's assistance (or at least his methods) was extensively used by Speaker Madigan to fight to elect Democrats like Carol Sente, Karen May, and Daniel Biss.

In all of these races, and many more, voters were warned that voting for a Republican meant that their daughters would be cruelly forced to bear rapists' children, that Republicans would take away a woman's right to kill her baby for any reason or no reason, and that parents might -- heaven forfend! -- actually be entitled to be consulted before their minor children sought abortions.

You opposed all that. And now you have to pay the bill. And so do I. And so do we all. The bill for abortion will come in the form of far higher taxes, still more state spending, and reliably fewer jobs due to the savings that businesses will realize from moving out of Illinois into nearby states with more reasonable restrictions on abortion, but far lower burdens on small businesses.

So, just how many partial birth abortions are you planning to have to make this worthwhile?

The name in the song, Won't You Come Home Bill Baily, has been slightly altered, from Baily, to Bill Daley, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley's brother and Obama's new Chief of Staff. Will Chicago cry the whole day long because he's gone, as the crooner of the song cries for Bill Baily to come home? The media is characterizing Daley as a moderate Democrat. What that means, in Chicago terms, I'll leave to your imagination. One thing you can take to the bank, is that Mr. Daley is pro-abortion and will articulately craft the most radical pro-abortion presidential speeches, with silvery oratory.

Hmmmmm. First Rahm Emanuel, returns to Chicago to run for Mayor; now Bill Daley leaves Chicago to become the President' Chief of Staff. Hmmmmm. Does Obama need Cook County held in the 2012 presidential election for the Democrats? It's looking more and more like electoral votes are being counted before the election by the White House.

Is Chicago becoming Washington DC? Or is Washington DC becoming Chicago? Hmmmmm. Seems as if Chicago politics are taking over, and Obama is more clever than we presumed. What better way to hold Cook County for the Democrats, before the 2012 election, by putting in place the players. Perhaps the orchestrator of this move is a master chess player.

So, whose to blame? The song croons," I know I'm to blame, and ain't it a shame, Bill Baily won't you please come home? So, whose to blame for this master move? Perhaps it's the Democratic machine.